DOCSLIB.ORG

Comments on the Green Paper

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Comments on the Green Paper Responses to the Green Paper Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy COM(2009)163 final OCEAN2012 c/o The Pew Charitable Trusts Square du Bastion 1A 1050 Brussels Belgium [email protected] www.OCEAN2012.eu OCEAN2012 – Transforming European Fisheries TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Acronyms 3 About OCEAN2012 4 Executive Summary 5 Introduction 7 The Current Common Fisheries Policy and its Outcomes 8 4. Overcoming the Five Structural Failings 9 4.1. Addressing the deep-rooted problem of fleet overcapacity 9 4.2. Focusing the policy objectives 12 4.3. Focusing the decision-making framework on core long-term principles 18 4.4 Encouraging the industry to take more responsibility in implementing the CFP 22 4.5. Developing a culture of compliance 24 5. Further Improving the Management of EU Fisheries 28 5.1. A differentiated fishing regime to protect small-scale coastal fleets 28 5.2. Making the most of our fisheries 31 5.3. Relative stability and access to coastal fisheries 38 5.4. Trade and markets – from catch to consumer 39 5.5. Integrating the Common Fisheries Policy in the broader maritime policy context 44 5.6. The knowledge base for the policy 49 5.7. Structural policy and public financial support 50 5.8. The external dimension 53 5.9. Aquaculture 60 Annex 1: Some General Comments on MSY, Sustainability and Precaution 63 2 OCEAN2012 – Transforming European Fisheries LIST OF ACRONYMS ACFA Advisory Committee on Fisheries and Aquaculture ACP African, Caribbean and Pacific group of countries CAP Common Agricultural Policy CFCA Common Fisheries Control Agency CFP Common Fisheries Policy CLA Catch Limit Algorithm EEA European Environment Agency EEZ Exclusive Economic Zone EFF European Fisheries Fund EPA Economic Partnership Agreement EU European Union FCR Fisheries Compliance Review FIFG Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance FPA Fisheries Partnership Agreement GES Good Environmental Status ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea ILO International Labour Organisation IMP Integrated Maritime Policy ITQ Individual Transferable Quota IUU Illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing IWC International Whaling Commission MPA Marine Protected Area MSFD Marine Strategy Framework Directive MSY Maximum Sustainable Yield PO Producer Organisation RAC Regional Advisory Council RBM Rights-Based Management RFMO Regional Fisheries Management Organisation RMP Revised Management Procedure SC Scientific Committee SROI Social Return on Investment TAC Total Allowable Catch UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea VMS Vessel Monitoring System WTO World Trade Organisation 3 OCEAN2012 – Transforming European Fisheries ABOUT OCEAN2012 OCEAN2012 is an alliance of organisations dedicated to transforming European Fisheries Policy to stop overfishing, end destructive fishing practices and deliver fair and equitable use of healthy fish stocks. OCEAN2012 was initiated, and is coordinated, by the Pew Environment Group, the conservation arm of The Pew Charitable Trusts, a non-governmental organization working to end overfishing in the world´s oceans. The founding members of OCEAN2012 are: Coalition for Fair Fisheries Arrangements (CFFA), Fisheries Secretariat (FISH), nef (new economics foundation), The Pew Environment Group and Seas At Risk (SAR). Our vision is of healthy oceans with abundant fish and wildlife contributing to human well being. Our mission is to ensure that the 2012 reform of the EU Common Fisheries Policy stops overfishing, ends destructive fishing practices and delivers fair and equitable use of healthy fish stocks. Our broad alliance of organisations employs scientific evidence and extensive experience in engaging decision-makers and stakeholders at all levels. 4 OCEAN2012 – Transforming European Fisheries EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The public debate on the third reform of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) began on April 22nd 2009 with the publication of the European Commission’s Green Paper. With over 80 percent of assessed fish stocks in Community waters deemed overfished and the fishing industry stumbling from one crisis to another, the current CFP is widely perceived as being a failure. The situation is dire. Unless this reform addresses the main structural failings of the CFP, fish stocks will be further depleted, exacerbating the crises facing the fisheries sector, with potentially disastrous consequences for the marine environment as well as fishery-dependent coastal communities. European Union (EU) fisheries are characterised by fleets that are able to catch more fish than are available, catch limits that are frequently set too high for reasons of political expediency, opaque decision-making procedures and a culture of non-compliance with the rules. The 2002 CFP reform brought some improvements in the areas of long-term management, stakeholder participation, control and allocation of subsidies. However, it did not prioritise achieving environmental sustainability – a prerequisite for the socially and economically sustainable exploitation of marine resources. The Commission stated in the Green Paper that it “believes that a whole-scale and fundamental reform of the CFP and remobilisation of the fisheries sector can bring about the dramatic change that is needed to reverse the current situation. This must not be yet another piecemeal, incremental reform but a sea change cutting to the core reasons behind the vicious circle in which Europe’s fisheries have been trapped in recent decades.”1 This contribution to the consultation responds to this challenge, proposing a fundamentally new, principle-centred approach to fisheries management in Community waters and for the EU fleet globally. It outlines the key issues that the OCEAN2012 alliance would like to see incorporated into a new CFP: Environmental objectives should be enshrined in the CFP as a prerequisite to fulfilling social and economic objectives; the precautionary approach and the ecosystem-based approach to fisheries management must form the fundamental basis upon which EU fisheries management is built. The CFP should define a decision-making framework ensuring that decisions are taken at the appropriate levels, differentiating between long-term strategic and operational management decisions. The CFP should define instruments and competencies which deliver sustainable fishing power2 at EU and regional level; this should include legally-binding and time-bound 1COM(2009)163 final: Green Paper – Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy. 2In this context, fishing power is a measure of the properties of a fishing vessel, measured in terms of the fishing mortality the vessel causes in the fish stock(-s); it must not be confused with engine power. 5 OCEAN2012 – Transforming European Fisheries fishing power limits per fishery, or group of fisheries, in a given area in the case of multi- species fisheries. Access rules should be based on a set of criteria that ensure a transition to, and support for, environmentally and socially sustainable fishing. The decision-making processes should be transparent and participatory. While there are a great number of specific questions in the Commission’s Green Paper, OCEAN2012 believes it is important to maintain, throughout the reform process, the focus on purpose. The purpose of this CFP reform must be more than tinkering at the edges and rectifying some perceived wrongs. It must be the creation of a foundation upon which future sustainable fisheries can be built. Any management tools should only be applied in a framework that: includes a specific set of management objectives; sets criteria for resource access based on environmental considerations (preferential access to rights for environmentally-friendly fishing techniques); includes provisions on social equity (initial allocation, restrictions on quota transfers, priority to owner operators, protection of smaller scale interests etc.); involves all affected stakeholders in their design and implementation; restricts concentration of ownership or creation of fishing monopolies or cartels (e. g. caps on ownership to avoid excessive concentration of rights); provides for cost recovery; and contains a sunset provision/exit strategy (allowing for performance review and – in case of need –the reclaim of the right). In addition, the implementation of any management tools should be in conjunction with: input and/or output limits based on scientific advice and local knowledge, and applied with a precautionary approach; consistent monitoring of all catch, bycatch and discards; adequate enforcement; regular review of the program against pre-determined objectives; and adaptive management (requires both short and long term impact monitoring); changes must be made if objectives are not being met. We have, in our contribution to the consultation, focussed on answering the questions raised, where they are raised, at times with general observations preceding our answers. Occasionally we have referred to answers in other sections, and where we believe the questions have been leading we have stated so. 6 OCEAN2012 – Transforming European Fisheries INTRODUCTION The current CFP is widely perceived as a failure. The European Commission recognises that the situation is dire, and that a fundamental reform of the policy is urgently needed in order to ensure the future of the fishing sector and of marine biodiversity. We are at the end of an era and the EU is at a crossroads. The EU can choose to make some difficult choices and embark upon the road to environmentally and socially sustainable fishing,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Brexit: the Unintended Consequences
    A SYMPOSIUM OF VIEWS Brexit: The Unintended Consequences Bold policy changes always seem to produce unintended consequences, both favorable and unfavorable. TIE asked more than thirty noted experts to share their analysis of the potential unintended consequences—financial, economic, political, or social—of a British exit from the European Union. 6 THE INTERNATIONAL ECONOMY SPRING 2016 Britain has been an liberal approaches to various elements of financial market frameworks. essential part of an Yet our opinions can differ. First, we have almost completely different experiences with our countries’ fi- opinion group nancial industries during the Great Recession. The Czech financial sector served as a robust buffer, shielding us defending more from some of the worst shocks. The British have had a rather different experience with their main banks, which market-based and to some extent drives their position on risks in retail bank- ing. This difference is heightened by the difference in the liberal approaches. relative weight of financial institutions in our economies, as expressed by the size of the financial sector in relation MIROSLav SINGER to GDP. The fact that this measure is three to four times Governor, Czech National Bank larger in the United Kingdom than in the Czech Republic gives rise to different attitudes toward the risk of crisis in here is an ongoing debate about the economic mer- the financial industry and to possible crisis resolution. In its and demerits of Brexit in the United Kingdom. a nutshell, in sharp contrast to the United Kingdom, the THowever, from my point of view as a central banker Czech Republic can—if worse comes to worst—afford to from a mid-sized and very open Central European econ- close one of its major banks, guarantee its liabilities, and omy, the strictly economic arguments are in some sense take it into state hands to be recapitalized and later sold, overwhelmed by my own, often very personal experience without ruining its sovereign rating.
    [Show full text]
  • Ten Issues to Watch in 2021
    ISSN 2600-268X Ten issues to watch in 2021 IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Author: Étienne Bassot Members' Research Service PE 659.436 – January 2021 EN This EPRS publication seeks to offer insights and put into context ten key issues and policy areas that are likely to feature prominently on the political agenda of the European Union in 2021. It has been compiled and edited by Isabelle Gaudeul-Ehrhart of the Members' Research Service, based on contributions from the following policy analysts: Marie-Laure Augère and Anna Caprile (Food for all? Food for thought), Denise Chircop and Magdalena Pasikowska-Schnass (Culture in crisis?), Costica Dumbrava (A new procedure to manage Europe's borders), Gregor Erbach (A digital boost for the circular economy), Silvia Kotanidis (Conference on the Future of Europe, in the introduction), Elena Lazarou (A new US President in the White House), Marianna Pari (The EU recovery plan: Turning crisis into opportunity?), Jakub Przetacznik and Nicole Scholz (The vaccine race for health safety), Ros Shreeves and Martina Prpic (Re-invigorating the fight against inequality?), Branislav Staniček (Turkey and stormy waters in the eastern Mediterranean) and Marcin Szczepanski (Critical raw materials for Europe). The cover image was produced by Samy Chahri. Further details of the progress of on-going EU legislative proposals, including all those mentioned in this document, are available in the European Parliament's Legislative Train Schedule, at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/ LINGUISTIC VERSIONS Original: EN Translations: DE, FR Manuscript completed in January 2021. DISCLAIMER AND COPYRIGHT This document is prepared for, and addressed to, the Members and staff of the European Parliament as background material to assist them in their parliamentary work.
    [Show full text]
  • Defence and Security After Brexit Understanding the Possible Implications of the UK’S Decision to Leave the EU Compendium Report
    Defence and security after Brexit Understanding the possible implications of the UK’s decision to leave the EU Compendium report James Black, Alex Hall, Kate Cox, Marta Kepe, Erik Silfversten For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RR1786 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif., and Cambridge, UK © Copyright 2017 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover: HMS Vanguard (MoD/Crown copyright 2014); Royal Air Force Eurofighter Typhoon FGR4, A Chinook Helicopter of 18 Squadron, HMS Defender (MoD/Crown copyright 2016); Cyber Security at MoD (Crown copyright); Brexit (donfiore/fotolia); Heavily armed Police in London (davidf/iStock) RAND Europe is a not-for-profit organisation whose mission is to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org www.rand.org/randeurope Defence and security after Brexit Preface This RAND study examines the potential defence and security implications of the United Kingdom’s (UK) decision to leave the European Union (‘Brexit’).
    [Show full text]
  • BRITAIN and the NEW EUROPEAN AGENDA Lionel Barber
    GROUPEMENT D'ETUDES ET DE RECHERCHES NOTRE EUROPE President : Jacques Delors CENTRE FOR EUROPEAN REFORM Director : Charles Grant BRITAIN AND THE NEW EUROPEAN AGENDA Lionel Barber Research and Policy Paper n°4 April 1998 (Originally published by the Centre For Reform, January 1998 Text updated by Lionel Barber and published by Notre Europe, April 1998) 44, Rue Notre-Dame des Victoires F-75002 Paris Tel : 01 53 00 94 40 e-mail : [email protected] http://www.notre-europe.asso.fr/ Study avalaible in French, English, German and Italian © Notre Europe, April 1998. 2 Lionel Barber Lionel Barber has been Brussels correspondent of the Financial Times since 1992. He has also worked as the FT's Washington correspondent. He has lectured widely in the US and Europe on the EU, transatlantic relations and US foreign policy. Author's acknowledgement I would like to thank Yves Mény, head of the Robert Schuman Centre at the European University Institute in Fiesole, who was kind enough to offer me a visiting fellowship in April-May 1996. Some of the ideas in this paper have their origin in many pleasant and stimulating exchanges at the Schuman centre. Notre Europe “Notre Europe” is an independent research and policy unit whose objective is the study of Europe – its history and civilisations, path to integration and future prospects. The association has started work in January 1997. It has a small, multi-national team of six in-house researchers (French, German, Belgian, Italian, Portuguese and British), chaired by Jacques Delors. “Notre Europe” participates in public debate in two ways.
    [Show full text]
  • New Perspectives Foreword
    The future of the EU: new perspectives Foreword Brexit has dominated the media and political landscape of the United Kingdom since the referendum of 2016. One interesting side effect of this has been the way the ropeanEu Union – still the UK’s nearest and largest trading partner – has been discussed solely in terms of its role in the Brexit negotiations. Yet whatever the outcome of these discussions, what the European Union is and does will continue to affect not only its own citizens but also the UK itself. This strikes me as an excellent moment to attempt to focus more directly on the EU itself and understand what is going on within it and how it might develop in the future. We find ourselves early in the EU’s new institutional cycle, with a new cast of EU leaders and a new set of policy priorities. Despite the much-vaunted unity that the 27 have displayed during the Brexit process, conflicts and tensions between member states, as well as between some of them and the EU institutions, persist. There remain fundamental disagreements between member states and institutions on issues like migration and the euro zone, not to mention more existential questions about future integration and the rule of law. Underlying everything are difficult to resolve differences on the balance of burden ring.sha I’m delighted we’ve been able to bring together some of the best young writers and thinkers on the EU to offer their take on the future of the EU’s institutions, its member tessta and its policies.
    [Show full text]
  • The New European Parliament: a Look Ahead
    THE NEW EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: A LOOK AHEAD JUNE 2019 THE NEW EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: A LOOK AHEAD More than 200 million EU citizens cast their votes between 23 and 26 May 2019 to choose the next cohort of MEPs. The new European Parliament is characterised by increased fragmentation and therefore a greater role for smaller parties. This briefing provides an overview of the The pro-European wave evidenced by the election results, explains what to expect rise of ALDE&R and the Greens coincided in the years to come and considers how with a sharp and unprecedented increase the new alignment of political groups will in voter engagement. Since the late 1970s, affect the EU’s balance of power. The turnout for the European elections had briefing also includes national steadily gone down, reaching a historic perspectives from Bulgaria, France, low of 43% in 2014. At 51%, this year’s Germany and the UK. In addition, we look turnout might be a significant outlier – or it at some of the key incoming and could show that, in an age of Brexit, outgoing MEPs and present a timeline of nationalism and climate change, the EU upcoming institutional changes. may yet have something unique to offer. The election results What to expect from the The 2019 elections marked the beginning 2019-2024 European of a new era: for the first time in the Parliament Parliament’s 40-year history, the two major A more collaborative Parliament parties have lost their majority. The centre- With the two biggest groups – the EPP right European People’s Party (EPP), and S&D – having shed seats and lost though still the largest group, saw the their combined absolute majority, the greatest reduction in seats, with the duopoly of power has been broken with centre-left Socialists and Democrats (S&D) smaller groups hoping this will be to their losing a similar number of MEPs.
    [Show full text]
  • The New European Union and Its Global Strategy
    The New European Union and Its Global Strategy The New European Union and Its Global Strategy: From Brexit to PESCO Edited by Valentin Naumescu The New European Union and Its Global Strategy: From Brexit to PESCO Edited by Valentin Naumescu This book first published 2020 Cambridge Scholars Publishing Lady Stephenson Library, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2PA, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2020 by Valentin Naumescu and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-5275-4068-5 ISBN (13): 978-1-5275-4068-2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Foreword ................................................................................................. viii Last Chance: the Reform of the European Union in the Post-Brexit Era Valentin Naumescu Acknowledgements ................................................................................ xvii Part I. The European Union as a Global Actor Chapter One ................................................................................................ 2 Is the Transatlantic Alliance Facing an Inevitable Unravelling? Alexandru Lăzescu and Octavian Manea Chapter Two ............................................................................................. 36 The European Union and
    [Show full text]
  • Great Expectations the New European Commission, Its Ambition and European Public Opinion
    Great expectations The New European Commission, its Ambition and European Public Opinion Great expectations The New European Commission, its Ambition and European Public Opinion Catherine E. de Vries & Isabell Hoffmann #2019 / 2 Catherine E. de Vries Professor of European Politics Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam [email protected] Isabell Hoffmann Senior Expert Bertelsmann Stiftung [email protected] www.eupinions.eu Description The Eurozone crisis has pushed reform of the European Union (EU) to the forefront of political debate. How can a Union of 28 states with a population of over half a billion be reformed to weather future economic crises and political challenges? Finding an answer to this question is extremely difficult not only because current reform proposals are so varied, but even more so because we lack insights into the preferences for reform amongst national elites and publics. Although EU support has interested scholars for over three decades now, we virtually know nothing about public support for EU reform. Current research focuses almost exclusively on the causes of support for the current project and fails to provide a sufficient basis for effective reform decisions. Surely, thefeasibility and sustainability of EU reform crucially hinges on the support amongst national publics. eupinions examines public support for EU reform by developing a theoretical model and employing cutting-edge data collection techniques. Our findings will aid policy makers to craft EU reform proposals that can secure widespread public support. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive Summary s the new European Commission prepares to take office, it faces a con- siderable challenge. The Commission must prove itself capable of tackling A pressing political issues, such as climate change, slowing economic growth, migration and challenges to the rule of law while exercising caution in balancing the interests of the various political forces that now make up the European Parliament and which influence the member states of the European Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Chronicle of an Election Foretold: the Longer-Term Trends Leading to the ‘Spitzenkandidaten’ Procedure and the Election of Jean-Claude Juncker As European
    LSE ‘Europe in Question’ Discussion Paper Series Chronicle of an Election Foretold: The Longer-Term Trends leading to the ‘Spitzenkandidaten’ procedure and the Election of Jean-Claude Juncker as European Commission President Martin Westlake LEQS Paper No. 102/2016 January 2016 LEQS is generously supported by the LSE Annual Fund Editorial Board Dr Joan Costa-i-Font Dr Vassilis Monastiriotis Dr Jonathan White Dr Katjana Gattermann Dr Sonja Avlijas All views expressed in this paper are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors or the LSE. © Martin Westlake Chronicle of an Election Foretold: The Longer-Term Trends leading to the ‘Spitzenkandidaten’ procedure and the Election of Jean-Claude Juncker as European Commission President Martin Westlake* Abstract By focusing on the near-term campaign in the 2014 European elections analysts have tended to over-look a series of longer-term trends that were jointly and inexorably leading to the Spitzenkandidaten (lead candidate) process and to some at least of the subsequent structural reforms to the Commission. The paper argues that those longer-term trends continue and that the (s)election of Jean-Claude Juncker as President of the European Commission and the structural reforms he subsequently introduced are better understood as steps in ongoing processes rather than fresh departures. Thus, what will happen in 2019 will have been conditioned not only by 2014, but also by previous elections and previous developments, as considered in this paper. Keywords: European Commission Presidency, Jean-Claude Juncker, Spitzenkandidaten, European Parliament, Longer-Term Trends * Visiting Professor, College of Europe, Bruges Senior Visiting Fellow, European Institute, London School of Economics and Political Science Houghton Street, London WC2A 2AE Email: [email protected] The Longer-Term Trends leading to the ‘Spitzenkandidaten’ procedure Table of Contents 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Does Brexit Spell the Death of Transnational Law?
    Brexit Special Supplement Does Brexit Spell the Death of Transnational Law? Ralf Michaels Duke University School of Law [[email protected]] Introduction Philip Jessup would not be pleased. Exactly sixty years after he published his groundbreaking book on Transnational Law,1 a majority of voters in the United Kingdom decided they wanted none of that. By voting for the UK to leave the European Union, they rejected what may well be called the biggest and most promising project of transnational law. Indeed, the European Union (including its predecessor, the European Economic Community), is nearly as old Jessup’s book. Both are products of the same time. That invites speculation that goes beyond the immediate effects of Brexit: Is the time of transnational law over? Or can transnational law be renewed and revived? It is worth remembering that Brexit is not an isolated event of anti-transnationalism. The most successful transnational movement today is, ironically, nationalism. Nationalists and populists in other EU Member States hope to ride the Brexit wave and inaugurate their own exits in the name of national sovereignty: Italexit, Nexit and Frexit are more than just idle word games. The EU might well collapse. And such nationalism, often with clear racist tendencies, goes beyond Europe, and beyond states within organizations. In India, Modi has instituted a new Hindu nationalism. In Russia, Putin is deploying a cynical form of nationalism. And in the United States, Donald Trump has already suggested that his campaign is about “the exact same thing” as Brexit, namely taking the country back from cosmocrats and elites.
    [Show full text]
  • Fair Fishing Deals
    Time for change Sustainable use of natural resources is for nations, and have agreed to work towards many developing countries the only means to the Millenium Development Goals set out in eradicate poverty, prevent food shortage and Johannesburg in 2002. fuel development. To ensure the future for To meet these goals and to give people Food security – fish is vital ! Exporting overfishing local communities that depend upon a and fisheries a chance, WWF calls on the healthy marine environment, fisheries access EU to adopt sustainability principles in its Marine fisheries are vital to food security in agreements must respect both local fishers agreements and advocate for Parties to the The lack of capacity leads to many access agreements many poorer coastal states. Over 39 per cent having no limit to how much fish can be caught, causing and marine resources and be part of an FAO Commission on Fisheries to solely severe environmental damage, bycatch of sometimes integrated approach to environmental enter into fisheries partnership agreements of the global population live within 100 threatened species, and ultimately to the depletion of fish sustainability and development. As such, with developing countries under the kilometers of a coast, and many of these resources on which local communities and industry of the they must be carefully designed, managed auspices of a fully developed fisheries people depend on the productivity of the sea. management plan and design those coastal State depend for income and food supply. and enforced. In Asia alone, over one billion people rely on The European Commission negotiates fisheries Industrialised nations have a responsi- according to the seven key principles agreements with third countries – Fisheries Partnership bility towards the future of people in poorer described above.
    [Show full text]
  • Framing Immigration During the Brexit Campaign
    Unsustainable and Uncontrolled: Framing Immigration During the Brexit Campaign Jessica Van Horne A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in International Studies University of Washington 2018 Committee: Kathie Friedman, Chair Scott Fritzen Program Authorized to Offer Degree: International Studies – Jackson School © Copyright 2018 Jessica Van Horne University of Washington Abstract Unsustainable and Uncontrolled: Framing Immigration During the Brexit Campaign Jessica Marie Van Horne Chair of the Supervisory Committee: Kathie Friedman, Associate Professor International Studies The British vote to leave the European Union in 2016 came as a major surprise to politicians and scholars. Pre-referendum scholarship indicated that while British voters had concerns about cultural issues, such as identity and immigration, they would ultimately decide based on economic considerations. However, post-referendum voter surveys and scholarship showed that immigration was a key issue for many Leave and Undecided voters. This paper addresses why immigration was such a significant issue, and why it was so closely tied to leaving the EU, by discussing how the official campaigns and print media sources prioritized and characterized the issue. I argue that the relative prominence of immigration in media coverage, and the increased likelihood that newspapers would use Leave-associated frames, which also corresponded with pre-existing negative attitudes towards immigrants, contributed to immigration’s overall
    [Show full text]